PRADEEP KUMAR Vs. GENERAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the plaintiff is against the dismissal of his suit for damages against the Railway on the ground of non-delivery.

(2.) CERTAIN books worth Rs. 10,700/- as per bill dated 18.4.1986 (Ex. P.2) were alleged to have been sent from Jaipur by Laxmi Book Binding Centre for being delivered to the appellant at Varanasi. The consignment of books was not delivered and, therefore, a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 22,500/- was filed by the plaintiff. The suit was resisted, inter alia, on the ground of non-service of notice under Section 78-B of the repealed Indian Railways Act. The objection prevailed and the suit was dismissed. Being aggrieved, the plaintiff has preferred this appeal.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant placed reliance in Union of India v. Punjab State Co-operative S.A.M. Fodn. Ltd. ; Union Northern Rly. v. Firm Anis Khan ; Indian Iron and Steel Co. v. Union of India ; Samaratmal v. Union of India and Union of India v. Imperial Tobacco Co. in support of his contention that the letter of Bhagchandra Jain could be treated as a notice under Section 78-B of the repealed Indian Railways Act. However, in none of these cases the notice of claim was served on any Station Master. Notice on commercial Superintendent of Railways was held to be sufficient compliance with Section 78-B of the Act in the peculiar facts and circumstances of those cases. I am, therefore, of the view that none of these cases relied for and on behalf of the appellant is of any help to the appellant.